I saw "Who Killed John O'Neil" some time last year. It could be difficult to follow, since it's overly detailed. It was pretty good, although not
the typical documentary. It is a good candidate for the Sundance Channel!!
Only 6 posts on this thread, but 60+ talking about pseudo physics and thermite. Whatever.
Well the movie is hard to sit through due to the directors and actors lacking training in anything related to movie making really.
His full name is John P. O'Neill. Apparently he antagonized some very powerful people, but did they kill him?
This clip paints a picture of a nefarious plot to take down a whistle blower (by hindsight after the attack) of the inside job which (likely) was 911
by having the terrorist attack of which the perps had foreknowledge, take out the whistle-blower.
to recap, John O Neill headed the anti terrorism unit (or similar) and resigned from his post explicitly citing obstruction from the Bush
administration in his investigation of Bin Laden, Alquaeda and their backers. Apparently Bush senior signed a presidential Directive (W-1991) which
made it a crime to investigate Abdullah(?) Bin Laden the edlest brother of Osama Bin Laden. He was also the only Bin Laden whom remained in the states
in the aftermath of the September attacks.
It all sounds very logical and conclusive. However there is a major problem with the story. If I understood it right, O'Neill resigned. That means he
was a private person. The FBI did not place him there. The alleged perps had no guarantee that O'Neill would be in the world trade center the day of
To make his placement there somehow per mediated in collusion with Kroll industries whom hired him, one would have to assume that Kroll were in on it.
Furthermore to have a reasonable guarantee that he would sign up on time to be dispatched by the terrorist attack, it should be shown that he signed
up with Kroll and that it was Kroll industries whom groomed him for some time until he finally left the FBI. In addition to secure his presence on the
WTC the day of the attack it should also be shown that Kroll industries made him an offer that was way above his market value.
However if it turns out that it was John who approached Kroll with an application solely out of his own initiative then the story of the perps using
the attack to dispatch a very credible whistle-blower falls apart. Everything else might still be true, mind you, but in that case he was not deemed
big enough a concern to consider have him killed.
Incidentally I found a website dedicated to this very topic, who killed John o'neill named very aptly whokilledjohnoneill.com... . Please
keep in mind that only because its on an internet page its not necessarily 100% accurate and in fact could be a red herring.
edit on 19-5-2015
by Merinda because: (no reason given)
This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.